Is McCarthy smarter than a 3rd grader?

[hoosier]

I am one of the most criticle Packer fans here and Mike McCarthy.

He simply put can do some really bone headed things. Often he clearly is stubborn to what is happening or slow to adjust.

Of course like we all might I hope that he will grow but Mike McCarthy is what he is and you can count on this. When you need to count on him the most he will let you down.

When Jordy Nelson was possibly removed from action for the remainder of the playoffs; and immediately after he was assaulted on the field:

a) What was Mike McCarthys reaction?

b) Did MM call out the Officiating ...demonstrate how pissed off he was?

What did you see happen specifically in terms of Mike McCarthy's reaction to his best WR being mugged and assaulted on the field?

Was what you saw typically the reaction you would desire from the Head Coach of the team you support as a fan?

So you were hoping for what? That he would react like a 3rd grader?

[woodbuck27]

So you were hoping for what? That he would react like a 3rd grader?

I expected him to react as if he had a pulse. Question Ed Hochuli and the fact there was no flag !

On what other Pro Team would we see the Head Coach's balls sucked up inside of his body the way MM's were after Jordy was so abused and no flag. Was MM frozen at that time?

Seriously MM's awareness here as in many other cases has to be questioned.

[Patler]

I expected him to react as if he had a pulse. Question Ed Hochuli and the fact there was no flag !

On what other Pro Team would we see the Head Coach's balls sucked up inside of his body the way MM's were after Jordy was so abused and no flag. Was MM frozen at that time?

Seriously MM's awareness here as in many other cases has to be questioned.

I wonder if MM, or any of the coaches were aware of the helmet use? I wonder if they were able to see it as anything other than a hard hit on a player who had gotten into a vulnerable position?

[Pugger]

I'm sure Mac and the other coaches weren't too pleased when they saw the tape afterwards. I'm still waiting to hear if Goodell is gonna fine Hall.

[King Friday]

To me, the decision comes down to the situation and risk/reward. Looking at a stupid analytics chart doesn't answer the question...because the no situation of 4th and 1 is exactly the same as another. Momentum is a large part of the game of football, and you can't measure it with analytics. That is what separates the truly great coaches from the "meh".

1. The Packers were the home team, and already held the momentum advantage. If the Packers were the road team, or the team looking to establish momentum, then I can understand the more aggressive philosophy to try to take control of the game. In this instance, there was NO NEED to give the Giants a chance to get back into the game. Punt the fucking ball and force the Giants offense to go 80 yards against our defense...which to that point had been playing well, considering we owned an 8 point lead and the edge in momentum.

2. The Giants were statistically one of the best NFL defenses against short yardage/goal line plays. Your decision played into their strength. The choice to convert with a running play makes it even more ridiculous, because the Packer running game is also one of the worst in the NFL. So now we are choosing to use our weakest weapon against one of their strongest. If we put the ball in Rodgers' hands, I have slightly more respect for the choice, although it would still be the wrong move.

3. I still have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the decision effectively prove that the reward of obtaining the 1st down was worth the risk of missing it. Claiming that decision was what caused the offense to suddenly become a juggernaut in the 2nd half is ridiculous. Aaron Rodgers is 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and probably 7th reason why the offense exploded. If a stupid, aggressive decision is all we need to get the offense going, then we should simply forget kickoffs and go on-side kick every time. We should score 100 points every game.

[smuggler]

#2 and #3 are the best points

[woodbuck27]

I'm sure Mac and the other coaches weren't too pleased when they saw the tape afterwards. I'm still waiting to hear if Goodell is gonna fine Hall.

Yea ..... the NFL is slow on this one. I cannot understand why that is the case?

[woodbuck27]

To me, the decision comes down to the situation and risk/reward. Looking at a stupid analytics chart doesn't answer the question...because the no situation of 4th and 1 is exactly the same as another. Momentum is a large part of the game of football, and you can't measure it with analytics. That is what separates the truly great coaches from the "meh".

1. The Packers were the home team, and already held the momentum advantage. If the Packers were the road team, or the team looking to establish momentum, then I can understand the more aggressive philosophy to try to take control of the game. In this instance, there was NO NEED to give the Giants a chance to get back into the game. Punt the fucking ball and force the Giants offense to go 80 yards against our defense...which to that point had been playing well, considering we owned an 8 point lead and the edge in momentum.

2. The Giants were statistically one of the best NFL defenses against short yardage/goal line plays. Your decision played into their strength. The choice to convert with a running play makes it even more ridiculous, because the Packer running game is also one of the worst in the NFL. So now we are choosing to use our weakest weapon against one of their strongest. If we put the ball in Rodgers' hands, I have slightly more respect for the choice, although it would still be the wrong move.

3. I still have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the decision effectively prove that the reward of obtaining the 1st down was worth the risk of missing it. Claiming that decision was what caused the offense to suddenly become a juggernaut in the 2nd half is ridiculous. Aaron Rodgers is 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and probably 7th reason why the offense exploded. If a stupid, aggressive decision is all we need to get the offense going, then we should simply forget kickoffs and go on-side kick every time. We should score 100 points every game.

An incredible effort in analysis to back up the obvious:

MM's decision to go for it on 4th and 1 given all the games circumstances was simply a bad decision.

[pbmax]

I do think analytics can prove that passing has a slightly better chance of winning short yardage than running.

Packers are a better passing team than running team.

The fact that they run in this situation much more often than pass is why Stubby is nicknamed Stubby.

[Fritz]

I do think analytics can prove that passing has a slightly better chance of winning short yardage than running.

Packers are a better passing team than running team.

The fact that they run in this situation much more often than pass is why Stubby is nicknamed Stubby.

That's not what his wife says.

[Pugger]

To me, the decision comes down to the situation and risk/reward. Looking at a stupid analytics chart doesn't answer the question...because the no situation of 4th and 1 is exactly the same as another. Momentum is a large part of the game of football, and you can't measure it with analytics. That is what separates the truly great coaches from the "meh".

1. The Packers were the home team, and already held the momentum advantage. If the Packers were the road team, or the team looking to establish momentum, then I can understand the more aggressive philosophy to try to take control of the game. In this instance, there was NO NEED to give the Giants a chance to get back into the game. Punt the fucking ball and force the Giants offense to go 80 yards against our defense...which to that point had been playing well, considering we owned an 8 point lead and the edge in momentum.

2. The Giants were statistically one of the best NFL defenses against short yardage/goal line plays. Your decision played into their strength. The choice to convert with a running play makes it even more ridiculous, because the Packer running game is also one of the worst in the NFL. So now we are choosing to use our weakest weapon against one of their strongest. If we put the ball in Rodgers' hands, I have slightly more respect for the choice, although it would still be the wrong move.

3. I still have yet to see anyone arguing in favor of the decision effectively prove that the reward of obtaining the 1st down was worth the risk of missing it. Claiming that decision was what caused the offense to suddenly become a juggernaut in the 2nd half is ridiculous. Aaron Rodgers is 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and probably 7th reason why the offense exploded. If a stupid, aggressive decision is all we need to get the offense going, then we should simply forget kickoffs and go on-side kick every time. We should score 100 points every game.

Excellent post. The only reason nobody is bitching about it now is because we won the game. It was a moronic move in every sense. Mac did say in a later PC he screwed up there. I hope he doesn't do anything this stupid again on Sunday.